By: Arifin *)
Jakarta – Execution of the six drug case prisoners by the government, which consists of five foreigners and a citizen cause reactions of some governments concerned. As reported by the daily newspaper The Media Indonesia Edition January 20, 2015, after the execution, the Netherlands and Brazil draw their big ambassador in Indonesia. While the Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbot wrote to the President Joko Widodo asked for leniency for citizens. Surely this reaction is normal as a form of protest and advocacy efforts of the state to its citizens in other countries. This attitude should not need to be raised.
Not only Indonesia, several countries in the world also carry the death penalty. Based on data from Amnesty International in 2013 , said executions increased 15 percent compared to the year 2012 by 22 countries , including the US as many as 39 people , Saudi Arabia 79 people , as many as 169 people of Iraq , and Iran as many as 369 people. While China, according to German news site Deutsche Well, launch in 2013 there were 2,400 prisoners died at the hands of the executioner. In Indonesia, only three prisoners who were executed in 2013 and 6 people were executed in early 2015.
Lecturer in the Department of Criminal Law, Faculty of Law, University of Indonesia, Akhiar Salmi, mentions three crimes that drug kingpin, terrorists, and criminals, in clear violation of human rights. So if given the maximum sentence to the death penalty, it is appropriate rules and regulations.
If referring to the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the death penalty does not violate human rights because of the qualifying crime in the articles of the Narcotics Law can be equated with “the most serious crimes”. According to the provisions of Article 6 paragraph 2 of the ICCPR which states, “In countries roommates have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime and not contrary to the provisions of the present Covenant and to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This penalty can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgment rendered by a competent court”.
While trafficking of narcotics is considered very harmful and dangerous to human life, society, nation, state and national defense of Indonesia as stipulated in Law No. 35 of 2009 on Narcotics.
Therefore the imposition of the death penalty for such crimes is a logical consequence to Indonesia’s participation in the Convention on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. It is stipulated in Article 3, paragraph 6 of the Convention, which essentially states can maximize the effectiveness of law enforcement related to narcotics and psychotropic substances with regard to the need to prevent crime in question. It is also supported by the provisions of Article 24 of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances which mentions “a party may adopt more strict of severe measures than those provided by this Convention if, in its opinion, such measures are desirable or Necessary for the prevention or suppression of illicit traffic”.
Thus there is no reason for the government of Indonesia to not implement the death penalty in its current condition. The next question is whether the Indonesian government should as a sovereign state and has the self-esteem in the international world, can continue to consistently be the country that has the spirit of the rule of law while upholding international Human Rights values.
*) The Author Is Jakarta Regional Contributors
